OPUS 4 Latest Documents RSS FeedLatest documentshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/index/index/
Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:55:31 +0100Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:55:31 +0100Metaphern in der Sprache der Psychologie : Wodurch wird die fachliche Definition von Emotionen für Laienrezipienten leichter verständlich?http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/35347
Šárka Valováarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/35347Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:55:31 +0100[Rezension zu:] Hümmer, Christiane (2009): Synonymie bei phraseologischen Einheiten. Eine korpusbasierte Untersuchunghttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/34109
Rezension zu Hümmer, Christiane (2009): Synonymie bei phraseologischen Einheiten. Eine korpusbasierte Untersuchung. Frankfurt a. M.: Lang. ( = Potsdamer Linguistische Untersuchungen; 3), (zugl. Phil. Diss. Potsdam 2007), 357 Seiten. ISBN 13: 978-3-631-58242-8Sven Staffeldtarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/34109Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:04:59 +0200Emotionen und sprachliche Feldstrukturen : Überlegungen zum Status, zu Außengrenzen und zur internen Struktur eines Feldeshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33981
Hana Bergerováarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33981Thu, 28 Aug 2014 12:30:20 +0200Emotionen in Comicshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33836
Gabriela Rykalováarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33836Tue, 08 Jul 2014 17:03:03 +0200Emotionen in den Schlagzeilen : Nordkorea meldet "erfolgreichen Atomtest" ; KLDR vyděsila svět jaderným testemhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33632
Michaela Kaňovská; Zdenka Křížkováarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33632Tue, 08 Jul 2014 16:51:50 +0200Die Konnotation 'emotional' im Sprachsystem und im Texthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33559
Horst Ehrhardtarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33559Tue, 08 Jul 2014 15:09:03 +0200Der Ausdruck von Emotionen in der deutschen und tschechischen Phraseologie am Beispiel von Schamhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33552
Eva Cieślarováarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33552Tue, 08 Jul 2014 13:14:50 +0200Metaphorische Konzepte in Hand-Somatismen des Deutschen und Albanischen : Eine vergleichende Untersuchung im Lichte der kognitiven Linguistikhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33534
Sonila Sadikajarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33534Tue, 01 Jul 2014 17:01:49 +0200Verbalaktion ist Körperaktion : Bemerkungen zur metaphorischen Konzeptualisierung von Sprechaktenhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33497
Sven Staffeldtarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/33497Tue, 17 Jun 2014 15:27:37 +0200Ausdrucksweisen der Possessivität im Deutschen und im Slowakischen : Eine konfrontativ-kontrastive linguistische Analysehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/32344
Der Beitrag präsentiert die Problematik der Possessivität in zwei typologisch diversen Sprachsystemen. Die Autoren analysieren die Ausdrucksweisen und die Spezifika der Kategorie der Possessivität in der deutschen Sprache (als einem Repräsentanten der germanischen Sprachgruppe) und in der slowakischen Sprache (als einem Repräsentanten der slawischen Sprachgruppe und zugleich der Muttersprache der Autoren). Es werden die vielseitigen semantischen und strukturellen Aspekte in beiden Sprachen beschrieben, wobei die konfrontative und kontrastive Betrachtung von Bedeutung ist. Es wurden die Konstruktionen beider Sprachen ausgewählt, die nach der von den Autoren angenommenen Begriffsbestimmung der Possessivität als possessiv zu betrachten sind. Die präsentierte Problematik kann für weitere Analysen und Untersuchungen sowohl im Bereich der Sprachwissenschaft als auch für die Erweiterung der interlingualen Kompetenz in beiden Sprachsystemen inspirierend und hilfreich sein.Eva Čulenová; Ladislav György; Jana Miškovská; Eva Schwarzováarticlehttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/32344Wed, 20 Nov 2013 12:33:34 +0100Rethinking the Adjuncthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30739
The purpose of the present paper is twofold: first, to show that, when defining the adjunct, it is necessary to distinguish in a strict modular way between the syntactic level and the lexico-semantic level. Thus, the adjunct is a syntactic category on a par with the specifier and the complement, whereas the argument belongs to the same set as does (among others) the modifier. The consequence of this distinction is that there is no direct one-to-one opposition between adjuncts and arguments. Nor is there any direct one-to one relation between adjuncts and modifiers.
The second and main purpose of the paper is to account for the well-known difference between the position of a specific set of modifiers (cause, time, place etc.) in, on the one hand, English and Swedish, on the other, German. In English and Swedish the default position of these modifiers is postverbal, whereas in German it is preverbal. Further, in English and Swedish, these modifiers occur in a mirror order compared with their German counterparts, an order which, from a semantic point of view, is not the expected one. I shall demonstrate that this difference is due to the different settings of the verbal head parameter, the former languages being VO-languages and the latter being OV -languages. I shall further argue that in English and Swedish these modifiers are base generated as adjuncts to an empty VP, which is a complement of the main verb of what I shall call the minimal VP (MVP), whereas in German they are adjuncts on top of the MVP. Finally, I shall argue that the postverbal modifiers move at the latest at LF to the top of the MVP, in order to take scope over it, the restriction being 'Shortest move'. The movement results in the correct scope order of the postverbal modifiers.
The proposed structure also accounts for the binding data, in particular for the binding of a specific Swedish possessive anaphor 'sin'. This pronoun, which may occur within the MVP, must not occur within the postverbal modifiers in the empty VP. This supports the assumption that there is a strict borderline between the MVP and the assumed empty VP. The account is also in accordance with the focus data, the specific set of modifiers being potential focus exponents in a wide focus reading in English and Swedish, but not in German.Inger Rosengrenbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30739Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100German Participle II Constructions as Adjunctshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30743
The present investigation is concerned with German participles II (past participles) as lexical heads of adjuncts.
Within a minimalist framework of sound-meaning correlation, the analysis presupposes a lexicalist conception of morphology and the differentiation of Semantic Form and Conceptual Structure. It is argued that participles II have the same argument structure as the underlying verbs and can undergo passivization, perfectivization and conversion to adjectives. As for the potential of participles to function as modifiers, it is shown that attributive and adverbial participle constructions involve further operations of conversion. Participle constructions are considered as reduced sentences. They do not have a syntactic position for the subject, for an operator (comparable to the relative pronoun in relative clauses) or for an adverbial relator (as in adverbial clauses). The pertinent components are present only in the semantic structure.
Two templates serve the composition of modifiers - including participle constructions - with the modificandum. It is necessary to differentiate between modification which unifies two predicates relating to participants or to situations and frame setting modification where the modifier is given the status of a propositional operator.
The proposed analysis shows that the high degree of semantic underspecification and interpretative flexibility of German participle II constructions resides in the indeterminacy of participles II with respect to voice and perfect, in the absence of certain constituents in the syntactic structure and in the presence of corresponding parameters in the Semantic Form of the participle phrases.Ilse Zimmermannbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30743Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Über die syntaktische Position der Satztopiks im Deutschenhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30771
Das Papier argumentiert anhand einer Reihe von Phänomenen für die Existenz einer ausgezeichneten Topikdomäne im Mittelfeld des deutschen Satzes. Deutsch ist somit Diskurs-konfigurational hinsichtlich Topiks. Die Beobachtung erlaubt die Beantwortung einiger grundlegender Fragen wie die nach der möglichen Anzahl van Satztopiks, nach der Möglichkeit von Satztopiks in eingebetteten Sätzen oder nach dem Zusammenhang von Scrambling und Topikstatus. Die These, die 'starke' Interpretation einer indefiniten Phrase impliziere deren Topikstatus, wird zurückgewiesen. Syntaktische Eigenschaften der Topik-Voranstellung im Mittelfeld werden herausgearbeitet und ihre Implikationen für die Theoriebildung werden erörtert.Werner Freybookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30771Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Was symbolisieren die bestimmten Artikel des Deutschen?http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30772
Eine wesentliche morpho-syntaktische Eigenschaft pronominaler Formen ist ihre Kongruenz mit dem Nomen. In den Grammatiken werden die pronominalen Paradigmen deshalb anhand der Kategorien des Nomens konstruiert. So wird traditionellerweise im Deutschen für all die verschiedenen pronominalen Elemente wie bestimmter/unbestimmter Artikel, Negationsartikel, Possessiv- und Demonstrativpronomen, starke/schwache Adjektive ein und dieselbe Struktur des Paradigmensystems zugrundegelegt. Die 3 Genusklassen konstituieren je ein Paradigma im Singular sowie ein gemeinsames Pluralparadigma. Jedes dieser 4 Paradigmen hat 4 Kasuspositionen, Nom., Gen., Dat., Akk. Dies ergibt ein Paradigmensystem mit 16 Paradigmenpositionen. Jede Position beschreibt eine der möglichen syntaktischen Umgebungen von nominalen Einheiten auf der Äußerungsoberfläche. Nicht nur im Deutschen existiert nun aber keineswegs für jede dieser Positionen auch eine eigenständige pronominale Form. Die Diskrepanz ist bekanntlich beachtlich. Das Paradigmensystem des bestimmten Artikels - das hier exemplarisch diskutiert werden sol1 - weist mit 6 Formen noch den größten Formenreichtum auf. Das Demonstrativpronomen dies und der Negationsartikel kein z.B. haben 5 distinkte Formen, die schwachen Adjektive schließlich nur 2.
Die Frage, die sich unmittelbar aufdrängt, ist, welche (grammatische) Ratio steckt hinter diesem hohen Maß an Formidentitäten. Inwieweit haben wir es hier mit motivierten Synkretismen, d.h. auf inhaltlich begründeten Neutralisationen beruhenden Formidentitäten, und/oder zufälligen Homonymien zu tun?Dagmar Bittnerbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30772Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Über Indefinita und ihre Plazierung im Mittelfeldhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30774
Indefinita und ihre verschiedenen Interpretationsmöglichkeiten sind seit längerem Gegenstand intensiver linguistischer Diskussion. Die folgenden Bemerkungen diskutieren einige in der Literatur häufig vertretene Thesen zum Zusammenhang der Positionierung einer indefiniten NP im deutschen Mittelfeld und ihrer Interpretation. Es wird argumentiert, daß diese Thesen den empirischen Gegebenheiten nicht gerecht werden. Dies gilt damit auch für einige Thesen zur Umstellung im Mittelfeld (Scrambling).Werner Freybookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30774Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100On the interpretation of wh-clauses in exclamative environmentshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30795
In this paper, a class of sentences in German is discussed that are often called whexclamatives. […]
So called wh-exclamatives can be roughly characterized as wh-clauses that are embedded under exclamative predicates like erstaunt sein/to be amazed at [...] or that are used as the basis for an exclamation [...].
One can ask if wh-exclamatives are a clause-type of their own, in particular, whether they are different from wh-clauses in question environments, that is under question predicates like to ask or to wonder or used as questions. It is often assumed that wh-clauses in exclamative contexts, both embedded and unembedded, are indeed different from wh-clauses in interrogative or question environments [...], at least regarding their semantical type, see for example Elliot (1971, 1974), Grimshaw (1979, 1981), Zaefferer (1983, 1984), Altmann (1 987, 1993). […]
I assume with Grimshaw (1979) that so called wh-exclamatives and wh-interrogatives are alike with respect to their syntactical properties. In addition, I think that they are also alike semantically. So, what I like to do here is to evaluate the following hypothesis:
So-called wh-exclamatives are of the same semantical type as wh-interrogatives.Franz-Josef d'Avisbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30795Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Scrambling and Reference in Germanhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30802
Although the linear order of arguments (and adverbials) in German is relatively free, it underlies certain restrictions; these don’t apply to the so-called unmarked order for arguments (Lenerz 1977) and adverbials (Frey/Pittner 1998). It is a common assumption to take the unmarked order as basic and derive all other orders from it by scrambling, whatever its specific characteristics may be (cf., amongst others, Haider/Rosengren 1998). The observable restrictions obtaining for some linear ordering may then be considered as constraints on a movement operation (scrambling). [...] In the following, I will try to present the outlines of a possible explanation for the restriction, based on a proposal governing the proper referential interpretation of indefinite NPs.Jürgen Lenerzbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30802Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Sentence mood constitution and indefinite noun phraseshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30803
Sentence mood in German is a complex category that is determined by various components of the grammatical system. In particular, verbal mood, the position of the finite verb and the wh-characteristics of the so called 'Vorfeld'-phrase are responsible for the constitution of sentence mood in German. This article proposes a theory of sentence mood constitution in German and investigates the interaction between the pronominal binding of indefinite noun phrases which are semantically analyzed as choice functions. It is shown that the semantic objects determined by sentence mood define different kinds of domains which have to be uniquely accessible as the range of the choice function. The various properties of the pronominal binding of indefinites can be derived by the interplay of the proposed theoretical notions.Horst Lohnsteinbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30803Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100The Thematic Interpretation of Plural Nominalizationshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30830
Nominalizations, in German as well as in other languages, are systematically polysemous, a fact that has been widely discussed in the linguistic literature [...]. In this paper, I will discuss certain asymmetries concerning the interpretation of the postnominal genitive [...].Veronika Ehrichbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30830Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Nominalizations and Temporal Prepositionshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30831
In this paper, we deal with the semantic interaction between ung-nominalizations of different event types and temporal prepositions like wiihrend 'during', vor 'before', nach 'after', bis 'until' and seit 'since'. According to the two-level-approach to selnantics (Bierwisch 1983, Bierwisch / Lang 1989), we will argue that the meaning of ten~poral prepositions is determined on the level of semantic form (SF). When combined with an event nominal, the period in time required by the preposition has to be inferred on the level of conceptual structure (CS). Very often, the exact nature of the period in time is determined by pragmatic factors. There are, however, some important restrictions to this inference procedure which rely on the event noun's Aktionsart. In Ehrich/Rapp (2000), it was claimed that eventive ungnominals inherit the Aktionsart of their base verb. This assumption receives strong support by the data presented in this paper.Veronika Ehrich; Irene Rappbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30831Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Ein Zweifelsfall: zweifeln im Deutschenhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30857
Markus Fischerbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30857Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100How the Left-periphery of a Wh-relative Clause Determines Its Syntactic and Semantic Relationshipshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30901
This paper discusses a certain class of German relative clauses which are characterized by a wh-expression overtly realized at the left periphery of the clause. While investigating empirical and theoretical issues regarding this class of relatives, it argues that a wh-relative clause relates syntactically to a functionally complete sentential projection and semantically to entities of various kinds that are abstracted from the matrix clause. What is shown is that this grammatical behaviour clearly can be attributed to the properties of the elements positioned at the left of a wh-relative clause. Finally, a lexically-based analysis couched in the framework of HPSG is given that accounts for the data presented.Anke Hollerbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30901Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100The 'separate performative' account of the German right dislocationhttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30960
In my paper, I show that the so-called German right dislocation actually comprises two distinct constructions, which I label 'right dislocation proper' and 'afterthought'. These differ in their prosodic and syntactic properties, as well as in their discourse functions. The paper is primarily concerned with the right dislocation proper (RD). I present a semantic analysis of RD based on the 'separate performative' account of Potts (2004, 2005) and Portner (forthc.). This analysis allows a description of the semantic contribution of RD to its host sentence, as well as explaining certain semantic constraints on the kind of NP in the RD construction.Maria Averintseva-Klischbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30960Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Manner modification of stateshttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30967
In a recent contribution to a long-standing discussion in semantics as to whether the neo-Davidsonian analysis should be extended to stative predicates or not, Maienborn (2004, 2005) proposes to distinguish two types of statives; one of them is said to have a referential argument of the Davidsonian type, the other not. As one of her arguments for making such a distinction, Maienborn observes that manner modification seems to be supported only by certain statives but to be excluded by others (thus linking the issue to the use of manner modification as one major argument in favour of event semantics, cf. Parsons 1990). In this paper, it is argued that the absence of manner modification with Maienborn's second group of statives is actually due to a failure of conceptual construal: modification of a predicate is ruled out whenever its internal conceptual structure is too poor to provide a construal for the modifier; hence, the effects observed by Maienborn reduce to the fact that eventive predicates have a more complex conceptual substructure than stative ones. Hence, the issue of manner modification with statives is shown to be orthogonal to questions of logical form and event semantics. The explanatory power of the conceptual approach is demonstrated with a case study on predicates of light emission, adapting the representation format of Barsalou's (1992) frame model.Wilhelm Geuderbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30967Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100Presuppositons in processing : a case study of German "auch"http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30981
This paper presents two experimental studies investigating the processing of presupposed content. Both studies employ the German additive particle auch (too). In the first study, participants were given a questionnaire containing bi-clausal, ambiguous sentences with 'auch' in the second clause. The presupposition introduced by auch was only satisfied on one of the two readings of the sentence, and this reading corresponded to a syntactically dispreferred parse of the sentence. The prospect of having the auch-presupposition satisfied made participants choose this syntactically dispreferred reading more frequently than in a control condition. The second study used the self-paced-reading paradigm and compared the reading times on clauses containing auch, which differed in whether the presupposition of auch was satisfied or not. Participants read the clause more slowly when the presupposition was not satisfied. It is argued that the two studies show that presuppositions play an important role in online sentence comprehension and affect the choice of syntactic analysis. Some theoretical implications of these findings for semantic theory and dynamic accounts of presuppositions as well as for theories of semantic processing are discussed.Florian Schwarzbookparthttp://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/30981Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:45:05 +0100